But you can reckognize the futility of your judgement and decide not to rely upon it. I hear atheist all the time make statements that God isn't worthy of worship because He is a dick....their thinking is flawed.

Sure i guess. But if God comes back and smites the unbelievers and he slowly puts me to death with a long period of torment none of that much matters. Ill think, ill feel like hes an ass. No amount of reason could override that feeling judgment.

Look i know somehow when it comes to God believers say they can just turn off their moral compass or jam it on high and go with Gods no matter what.

But i dont buy it. I think if God came down and did something truly evil in front of you, you would think at least at first, what a ****. Now maybe you can say you can turn that off after you accept God knows best, but idk, i dont think i could. Not if it was a vary evil action.

And that goes for any good action from God also. I couldn't just convince myself that something i think is morally good is bad.

I'm not asking you to change your feelings. I'm asking you to reckognize statements like "God isn't worthy of worship because He did/allowed...." are not sound arguments.

How else would you define 'good'? If you start from the assumption that suffering is bad, it follows that we ought not to take actions that cause suffering.

Your example is completely irrelevant and seems to be aimed at your own argument more than mine. Obviously the time traveler would be performing an evil act, since he would have no way of knowing what Hitler would grow up to do; God, being omniscient and omnipotent, knows the consequences of every possible action and can initiate/prevent any action, and so is directly responsible for whatever suffering is in the world. You criticise me for making definitive claims about God, but that's exactly what you're doing when you dismiss any objection to God's behaviour on the grounds that he is perfectly moral. Where's your evidence for that assumption (hint: 'The Bible' is not a valid answer)?

The bible is the answer but it helps if you have a mighty fine teacher explain it to you.

Sure you are. If the biblical God did some of the stuff thats credited to him as i understand it, i cant help but feel he is not worthy of worship. I cant just force myself to not feel killing every last man, women and child of a tribe is wrong. Its not a choice to think genocide is right or wrong, its a feeling to think its wrong. Its not a choice to think a God like that is not worthy of worship, its a feeling.

Life on this planet did not start out with the ability to suffer. The ability to suffer is an evolved beneficial trait. Your assumption that suffering is bad is flawed.

Wow very interesting.

What's your stand on theistic evolution Stu?

So the Bible is the answer because the Bible says that itself is the answer? Cool.

...wat?

What would that possibly have to do with anything?

You brought it up...Your post started out with "If you start from the assumption that suffering is bad, it follows that we ought not to take actions that cause suffering."

If your thinking rests on the assumption that suffering is bad then it is inherently flawed.

I'm not going to take a stance here, but this is wrong. The time traveler is from the future. He very much knows what Hitler was going to grow up to do. Those that didn't time travel and saw him are a different story.

Being a theist and being a believer in evolution I like it.

What is the time frame on when suffering became a human trait Stu?

Do they have a record on that?

What I said above is you probably heard a second rate version.

Seek and ye shall find.

Obv. I'm aware of what the point of the example was, and you are too. I explain in my previous post why the example is a bad one.

Mighty fine teachers have been able to explain exactly what the bible means to those that were unable or unwilling to read and reason on their own. Unfortunately some of their teachings led to Jonestown, Waco, Heavens Gate, etc.

Um, you sure? Let's look again.

But I already explained why this was wrong:

So, what are you talking about?

Replace 'he' with 'an observer'. Not sure what went wrong there.

Regardless, the analogy still doesn't hold water.

I personally do not like God, because human nature is sin, and sin causes us to reject God. All true Christians, that truly acknowledge the existence of God, Jesus, and the Bible, are therefore not themselves anymore, and has God living in them. So the decisions I make and the way i live is not controlled by myself anymore. So your answer is no, I do not, but there is no 'I' anymore in me. Obviously this question is directed towards confused people that call themselves "Christians" fearing the possibility of hell. Old self/new self is a theme for true Christians (hence the phrase born AGAIN).

This is the realest answer you can get.